If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I haven't used iTunes in years, but I still dilligently update when the auto updater asks me to.

Spoiler:

Originally Posted by RazoR

But islamism IS a product of class warfare. Rich white countries come into developing brown dictatorships, wreck the leadership, infrastructure and economy and then act all surprised that religious fanaticism is on the rise.

I haven't used iTunes in years, but I still dilligently update when the auto updater asks me to.

That program is the only thing that will drop me out of a game to demand my attention. Not even Windows Update will do that.

You then cleaely hadn't installed WSL (aka "the Window's Linux") before 1703. That had a scheduled task which popped up the Linux bash and did a "sudo apt update" every <x> days ... regardless of what's been running in the foreground.

While the intention was good (keep also the WSL updated), the implementation clearly wasn't optimal. I get it that WSL was considered to be Beta at that time. But that was one hell of an obvious and easy to spot flaw.

While i see the irony of sorting that clip under RPGs... I think youtube may be drunk.
You can realy see how it has tried to fit my dwarf fortress watching into the different categories. "To the left we have stuff that's ...eh ...similar? no? ok. how about we go this direction instead? You like ascii, right?"
Also. i3 gaps is awesome.

Ever since windows 7 I can't use any window manager that doesn't snap windows to half or full screen if I drag them to the side/top of the screen.

KDE <3

My biggest problem that keeps me in W7 still is I'm a gamer. and a sound engineer. The good daws don't work under Linux. Ardour exists, but it simply can not compete. Reaper works through wine and you can even run VSTs now, but not if they require an iLok. And alot of the good ones do.
So the main desktop machine is still W7, but all my 3 laptops run Linux now. With Mint being as good as it is, I find no reason not to. Getting insane batterytime out of my 10 year old X200S with XFCE.

nah man, they don't run two of the 3 fastest conventional super computers on the planet or anything

This is also a poor indicator. IBM have a vast but stagnant hardware business. They ship something like $1.8Bn of "systems" per quarter, mostly made up of their mainframe install base. The problem is this is completely stagnant, increasing by 1% at last count. AWS's last round of results was a mind-boggling 46% growth, and that was behind expectations.

IBM are still there, but they're going nowhere and they've got no idea what they're doing.

RHEL is the de facto enterprise linux. Something like 95% of our customer install base uses RHEL and nothing but RHEL. A significant subset of those are looking to deploy large-to-huge OpenShift environments to reduce their public cloud spend, as Kubernetes quickly becomes the de facto standard for running pretty much everything. None of those customers, despite invariably being IBM buyers in some form, had any plans to increase spending on IBM kit or on IBM services. Now they all, inevitably, do. There's no realistic alternative to RH's product suite on the market.

There'll be no short term impact. IBM are nuts, but they're not nuts enough to try and borg one of the most successful software companies of all time. That might happen eventually, but it's just as likely it goes the other way. IBM's execs know they're floundering, while Red Hat (the company) is filled with smart, switched on thinkers who get shit done. What they're not so great at is selling and doing services. There's a faint possibility of a future where an IBM sales force can sell and support, with a straight face, modern linux, private/hybrid cloud, identity management, devops, middleware and even Java.

The problem for IBM is that RH is genuinely the category leader in most/all of those. To achieve that outcome (which would give them purpose), they'll need to be making some hard choices about their existing product and solution portfolio, because RH's stuff is just better and at the end of the day IBM are buying the people, they're buying RHEL and they're buying OpenShift.

Alternatively, in 18 months IBM will have done their usual thing and I'll be neck deep in migration work as all my customer base have decided not to move forward with Blue Hat Enterprise Linux For The Hybrid Cloud With Cognitive Blockchain Analytics Powered By Watson.

Alternatively, in 18 months IBM will have done their usual thing and I'll be neck deep in migration work as all my customer base have decided not to move forward with Blue Hat Enterprise Linux For The Hybrid Cloud With Cognitive Blockchain Analytics Powered By Watson.

To me this deal basically translates to "IBM's big push to the cloud" with RHEL and OpenStack as the foundation.

If they've got even half an ounce of sense it'll be based on OpenShift. OpenStack is dead as far as the rest of the world is concerned. Once you get your head around Kubernetes and give it the proper love it deserves it blows everything else out of the water. It'll displace VMWare in most large enterprises within 5 years.

The OpenStack part is my interpretation, which could very well be wrong, ofc.

I made it based on the fact that Red Hat is a board member of the OpenStack foundation and also a major code contributor to it, if I'm not mistaken.

OpenStack has a place, but even big enterprises would be dumb, in most cases, to try and build a purely IaaS on-premises private cloud. The bang for the buck, as it where, is in the service orchestration layer, so your engineers only have to focus on code that brings value to your business. All the databases (ALL of the databases, including raw filesystem), networking gubbins, messaging systems and caches need to be scriptable and incredibly easy to invoke and interact with, because that is actually the largest win from cloud. OpenStack (as Iaas) will service the very low level Hardware -> VM abstraction layer, and then OpenShift can handle PaaS duties and actually be what engineers write code against, and manage containers, services and the general workflow of building systems.

I ran OpenStack in production for several years. It's incredibly skill intensive, as in, you need kernel and for sure networking stack expertise that very very few actually have, in my experience. Even the "Household name" I was working for could not compete cost wise with AWS and GCP (probably azure too, but we never too it seriously for internet facing services at that point in time). and so we eventually went there and saved literally 8-10x by refactoring our architecture to actually integrate fully with either of those two clouds, as I did projects on both. This was before OpenShift or any of the other On Prem PaaS where really viable.